Discussion Manga / Monster

Halfway in the series (exactly 37 episodes). I really don't get it guys. I don't see the nuanced discussion of morality and good vs evil here. Monster seems to confuse the question of judgement (does Johan deserve to be killed?) and the question of the greater good (Johan needs to be stopped so he can't kill more people). The former question is not raised well either because it was never Tenma's fault to begin with so he has nothing to angst about, and because he's clearly not killing out of revenge or anger. It would be a different story if Tenma was out for vengeance or some other personal reason, and/or Tenma himself had an ounce of darkness in him. They could've gone the way of Batman: Under the Red Hood, which posits a better reason for not killing a psychopathy serial killer even if it means the greater good: where do you draw the line for who to kill for the greater good? But Tenma isn't a long term vigilante, so that doesn't quite work out as well.

As for the latter question, the answer is pretty clear: if you don't stop this guy, he's going to kill a lot more people and that's literally what happens every time Tenma decides not to shoot. Now in real life it's highly unlikely Johan performs all these crimes without leaving some type of evidence for the police to arrest him, but the story is written in a way that Johan is practically God-like and can kill anyone he wants, so the story forces the kill or not kill choice rather than arrest him or not choice. In reality, the answer is obviously Tenma has no right to be a vigilante and be judge, jury, and executioner, but the scenario is designed to be extreme. So while utilitarianism obviously isn't the easy answer to every moral dilemma, in such an extreme case it pretty much is the easier answer.

I've heard someone say that the author left it deliberately ambiguous as to whether or not Tenma made the right choice in the end. I think there's no such ambiguity here. He thinks all lives are equal and no one has the right to condemn anyone to death, but clearly he values Johan's life over all the lives that Johan takes, and clearly he values his own clean conscience over those lives as well. It's OK to kill someone in self defense but it's not OK to kill someone to defend other people?

As for the discussion of evil, sin, and redemption, the series so far pretty much follows the same pattern of themes: that there's always the possibility of redemption, even for the most cold hearted of killers. I watched Master Keaton and the pattern of thinking is pretty much the same. It's either that or something about good people continuing to do good things in spite of the darkness surrounding them, as with Tenma and that back alley nurse he helped. There are of course exceptions; Eva, Richard Braun, for example. Sometimes it explores the reasons why people are messed up and the origins of evil; people like Dieter and Grimmer are scarred because of how they were raised. But saying that they can be better isn't really all that interesting thematically, though it might be touching emotionally.

Outside of the themes the plot and characterization are pretty good. The series is a good to great crime drama. It's just that for me the themes make it quite boring to watch because I don't care what Johan's background or motivations are (which is what much of the series is spent uncovering); pragmatically speaking he needed to die.

For my money Daredevil Season 3 has a better discussion of Monster's themes. We have a protagonist who genuinely has bloodlust and is losing faith in his ideals because his no killing rule has proven to be ineffective because the justice system is corrupt (not because Kingpin is some omnipotent embodiment of evil). We have an FBI agent who falls to corruption through a combination of personal mistakes and narrow roads (rather than starting out as a cold blooded killer like many of the characters in Monster that are later redeemed), but still ultimately redeems himself through self sacrifice. We have a psychopath who tries his best to do good and channel his killing tendencies through law enforcement, a much more nuanced character than Johan who pretty much just wants to watch the world burn and never dipped his toes on the side of good. We have a powerful big bad with a sympathetic backstory and genuine love inside him, who believes crime can only be controlled rather than quelled.

Believe me, I didn't make this post to shit on Monster, but to ask more seasoned viewers if I'm missing a layer of nuance to the show. It is still one of the best anime out there in terms of craftsmanship.

Edited by Recynon

Is Tenma and Nina really a Will They or Won't They? From my standpoint, it seems to be entirely subjective as to whether or not there's any sexual tension or attraction at all. At most you could argue that a few scenes show that Nina *might* have a crush. (Admittedly her "prince on a white horse" comment when they first meet is good support for that, but it's also possible that it was simply a joke Urasawa threw in there.) The only thing Tenma gets is what he says to her when he talks her out of suicide. And well...I fail to see how that indicates romantic interest over viewing her as something like a surrogate daughter? Or even just caring about her and not wanting to lose the one personal connection he hasn't completely severed because of his mission to kill Johan? Would this be better suited for YMMV or am I just holding a different opinion from the majority?

Edited by Angewomon Talk to the hand. Hide / Show Replies

The Messiah is no longer a trope. Please readd under a more appropriate trope.

• The Messiah: Kenzo Tenma - the guy helps immensely everywhere he goes, even if he's only in a town for a few days.
  • Nina makes friends basically everywhere she goes. Even when Johan dresses up as her, everyone in "her" block is giddy to have met the beautiful young lady.
  • Subverted by Johan, who is remarkably good at being barely noticed everywhere he goes. Most of the people in the series think that the bastard just doesn't exist because he is just too unreal. He is a Messiah for the worst people imaginable, though.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman

Has anyone ever read Another Monster that involved interviews with the characters, mainly about Tenma and Johan?

Of course, this includes many spoilers, but I thought some of the things said in there were really interesting.

If you've already seen all of Monster, feel free to highlight the spoilers I'm going to put down below.

Johan of all people whose obviously supposed to be a Complete Monster since the title of the anime is named after him is actually considered to be a Woobie, Destroyer of Worlds when he becomes a Death Seeker halfway through the story, and some people believe he is not a monster, that his plans drastically changed, and despite ruining many people's lives, some of those said victims have a hard time hating him, and are more awestruck than terrified or filled with rage. This gives me some really conflicted feelings on what exactly Johan's status should be. I just thought I'd let you'll know about that.

"Hell exists not to punish sinners, but to ensure that nobody sins in the first place." - Eikishiki Yamaxanadu (Touhou)

Is "black&white morality" applicable here? In the beginning there were pure and white Tenma and rotten Heinemanns.

Hide / Show Replies